RHY.10:5.4 - A changing delivery delay resembles a changed pace

In a constructed remote-cue case, the receiver obtains events at 0.10, 0.62, 1.14 and 1.66 seconds. Their 0.52-second intervals fit both a source whose period is 0.52 with constant delivery delay and a source whose period is 0.50 with growing delivery delay. The intended coordination is with the source performance.

An already available source-side record, aligned to the same time reference, gives 0.00, 0.50, 1.00 and 1.50. Subtracting these values from the received times gives delays of 0.10, 0.12, 0.14 and 0.16. Within the stipulated event matching and clock accuracy, the growing difference belongs to delivery; it does not justify changing the source’s continuing pace.

The selected move is to try an available cue channel with stable delay and establish the intended entry relation while retaining the 0.50 period. Its usability still needs a joint attempt. The calculation does not establish a human response or identify which component causes the delay.

Had the source-side times instead been 0.00, 0.52, 1.04 and 1.56, the same received series would have a constant 0.10 delay. The next question would concern the source pace and whether its change was intended. Without a usable second reference, keep both explanations open and choose a familiar cue contrast that could distinguish them.